I hypothise that there exists a set of people from the superset of ears smartasses who have the capability to do exceptional levels of reasoning in real life except in IQ test. Take the example of Richard feynman. He scored shit on an IQ test for his own good ie 122 allegedly yet we can see that he's one of the reminiscent giants in the scientific world. My point here is not to disapprove of the validity of IQ tests but rather mention that after a certain iq threshold, the intelligence of a person can't be gauged in terms of reality. I'm assuming the limit is 120+. After this limit, it's unlikely whether the iq of the person will actually predict his or her success in purely reasoning based fields eg. Physics
I've noticed this common trend of IQ tests being very biased towards the test taker's working memory. Complex patterns are not very difficult to spot after you learn all the basic permutations and combinations of patterns but what makes it hard is the prevalence of working memory which is oftentimes unable to hold information for too long.
Isn't it paradoxical that high working memory has a correlation of ~. 80 with g while high g with low wm still exist. I doubt whether the latter is documented or no but nevertheless low wm and high g can still theoretically exist given that the person is allowed to draw diagrams and everything while still possessing the ability of reasoning.
The so called genius IQs of the famous historical figures are not calculated in a scientific way. Yes, a mind can be very precocious but at the same time after reaching a certain age, the cognitive ability can peak suddenly as well for eg, my reasoning abilities developed manifold after being a teenager. This might be pseudoevidence because we need to consider the possibility of actually discovering the acumen for reasoning might contribute to the sudden increase as well but however it is scientifically documented that IQs suddenly increase or peak during teenage or when the person is synaptically adapting.
I've also noticed that most IQs test, the so called ones available, lack a common consensus. Some of them have shitloads of verbal reasoning. Some expect you to have a hard disk in your head with a high writing speed but low logical functioning. Some expect you to spot patterns which are impossible to inductively find using system 2 thinking, some expect you have to have a very powerful working memory and so on. So, what the fuck are we measuring? Even if you want to measure the pure reasoning ability, are today's iq tests really meant to measure the purest ability of logical reasoning?
( in my opinion, maths ( again, you have to grasp the concepts quickly and then employ it) , music and instant learning of concepts and checking of cognitive complexity while writing down theses are some valid ways)
It's a commonly held notion that learning concepts precociously is a good indicator of g but has someone tried teaching calculus actively to a 6th grader? Calculus is meant only for 16-17 year olds but it's easy enough for a 10 year old to understand to given that he is taught the basics.
The level of precocious understanding should be exceptional ( a kid programing when he's just 8-9 yo for an instance) and not something which can't be gauged simply because it's stereotyped for being practised by a certain age group.
Another trend IQ tests have is the level of executional abilities. Many of the questions are simply solved by applying methodical step by step approach. But executional skills can be honed too right?
I suppose one should not be bothered too much by his/her iq if he/she possesses a good abstracting ability and fast grasping. That's enough to keep you motivated and achieve what you want to achieve.
What are your opinions on this?
Jordan Ward
>Take the example of Richard feynman. He scored shit on an IQ test for his own good ie 122 allegedly yet we can see that he's one of the reminiscent giants in the scientific world
You've presented a terrible example. Feynman was a laymans "scientist". An entertainer first and foremost. Comparable to Neil Degrasse Tyson or Bill Nye of today.
What did Feynman invent? What did Feynman create? Theoretical physics is wrought with fraud. It's been taken over by "mathemagicians". Entertainers (often Jewish) who combine flashy equations with science-fiction to attract the swarming masses of "LOL I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" normies.
Look at the picture you posted. A Jewish man looking off into the distance. Behind him, a bunch of mysterious numbers (woah!). He then tells you about time-travel, black holes, worm holes, gluons quarks, bosons, sploobons gloobons and all the rest.
Con-artistry and acting does not require a particularly high IQ. Show me that Tesla, or Gauss, or Steinmetz had an IQ of 110-120.
Leo Brown
>Some of them have shitloads of verbal reasoning. Some expect you to have a hard disk in your head with a high writing speed but low logical functioning
Aren't spatial IQ tests often as simple as having a participant identify potential patterns in a string of objects?
Obviously testing Verbal IQ requires tests with "shitloads of verbal reasoning".
Samuel Turner
The guy won a Nobel Prize in physics, you fucking retard. He's nothing like Neil DeGrasse Tyson or Bill Nye, and not "first and foremost an entertainer". He contributed to quantum physics, quantum electrodynamics, particle physics, quantum computing and nanotechnology. He doesn't tell you about "time-travel, black holes, wormholes" you fucking idiot. You should castrate yourself.
Jose Reyes
I hope that someday I'll be able to make posts this low quality
Asher Walker
As a Mathematician, taking IQ tests is a waste of time. Creativity is far more important in research mathematics. The people who shill IQ are people like Jordan Peterson who are no doubt psychologists, or cargo cult Bayes worshiping rationalists.
Noah Watson
No its extremely important for everything, all of you are coping and its pathetic
Hudson Reed
t. Hasn't done anything remotely useful in their life
Ayden Brown
What's your IQ smart guy?
Eli Jones
>The guy won a Nobel Prize in physics,
Appeal to authority fallacy.
>He contributed to quantum physics, quantum electrodynamics, particle physics, quantum computing and nanotechnology.
In what way? Did any of his work assist in the engineering of new tech?
>I hope that someday I'll be able to make posts this low quality >No argument >Black twitter tier meme-pic.
You already are bud.
Eli Garcia
>Creativity is far more important in research mathematics.
Creativity and IQ are positively correlated.
Jordan Carter
> Veeky Forums iq poster It's highly likely that you took an online IQ test and use it as a coping mechanism, but explain to me how IQ correlates with success when your IQ is above 100?
So OP's threshold theory is incorrect? IQ and creativity are positively correlated even past thresholds of 120-125?
Kayden Moore
What the fuck are you talking about.
Feynman was nothing like NDT or Bill Nye. Feynman pioneered Quantum Electrodynamics, and he created the mathematics with is central to how quantum mechanics is formalized today. He worked on the Manhattan project for Christ sake. Actual physicists rank him highly among the most significant physicists of the 20th century.
It takes one set on of skills to pull it over on the public, an altogether different set to do so on the professional physics community.
It’s you who doesn’t understand the basics of what you’re talking about. Partical Physics is hardly speculative, literally that’s what all the the partical accelerators are built to investigate, and with them you can detect things like quarks.
You know what else can detect bosons? Your eyes. Light particles (photons) are a type of boson. Gluons are another type of Boson, specifically the boson which mediates the connection of quarks. Weird, it all fits together, like some sort of “Standard Model of Particle Physics”.
I suppose it all seems like magic when you aren’t bright enough to actually understand it, but it’s not. You clearly watch too much tv, and didn’t pay enough attention in math class. Stop letting the stupidly simplistic garbage that physicists say when they guest on talk shows be your entire understanding of the profession.
The deepest irony of all is that you finish off with ‘hes a con artist, unlike Tesla’, an actual famous con artist, notorious for stealing the inventions of others and but having superior salesman skills, and now is the subject of a internet cult which worships his writing from his descent into senility.
Hunter Jenkins
the modern tests are calibrated to diagnose retarded and mentally handicapped people. literally. andt hen to have the data be parsimonious among age groups, meaning it must be structured such that year old can take it
it specifically prioritises things like spatial cognition and things like pupil reaction. things that correlate to G by virtue of being genetically correlated to mutational load, but they are things that are measured n fucking dogs
the old myers briggs test is fine and has hardly ny error to it you fag
Adam Lopez
Yes, but more so in a way that would piss off an IQ evangelist. The aspergerian world view of applying IQ to everything is quite annoying, I know people like that in real life.
Ayden Diaz
But IQ and creativity are not. Most creative people are smart but most smart people are not creative.
James Murphy
IQ tests just measure how good you are at IQ tests.
Michael Brooks
everyone like this is as bad as the climate change deniers. you’re actively pushing us off a cliff with a smile on your face, you think you’re protecting yourself or people you sympathize with. can’t wait for 3 billion blaqs with 70-90 iq’s who have nukes and biological weapons, genetic engineering. should go smoothly, end of history, highest standard of living of all time and all the other stuff amirite user?
Juan Foster
it'd be difficult for you to be more incorrect, but you still have margins to increase
you could claim intelligence isnt genetic too
Jonathan Murphy
Feynman struggled with high school level philosophy questions
Robert Garcia
If they have genetic engineering, why do they have low IQ’s?
Jaxson Bell
reddit-tier meme
Cameron Richardson
Well, when you are talking about 3 billion blacks then it's a different ball game. When I talk about IQ scores, I talk about it in terms of individual measure, not group measure. What does this have to do with blacks anyway? Read some Evola and stop being an aspergerian retard applying IQ to everything.
Eli Carter
T H I N L Y V E I L E D P E T E R S O N T H R E A D
IQ points you don't have wont do shit for you. What's the use of discussing it after you've learned your number and have either resigned yourself to accept it or to disprove it?
Jonathan Garcia
Feynman exposed pseudo-philosophers
Jacob Powell
>Partical Physics is hardly speculative, literally that’s what all the the partical accelerators are built to investigate, and with them you can detect things like quarks.
You mean those $15 billion dollar moneypits that haven't advanced tech in any practical way?
>You know what else can detect bosons? Your eyes. Light particles (photons) are a type of boson. Gluons are another type of Boson, specifically the boson which mediates the connection of quarks. Weird, it all fits together, like some sort of “Standard Model of Particle Physics”.
The ability of my eyes to detect light is independent of flashy terminology and virtual particles. Light is a readily measurable phenomenon, virtual particles are not. I contest your model and your never-ending stream of newly invented particles to fill chalkboards with and receive grant money.
>The deepest irony of all is that you finish off with ‘hes a con artist, unlike Tesla’, an actual famous con artist
Tesla invented, patented and built technology integral to the operation of our electrical power grid today. What has Feynman patented?
Isaiah Robinson
So do most physicist. Even the best ones of the last century were nothing but amateurs compared to actual philosophers. Even smart people are bad outside their area of expertise. L'uomo universale is just a fantasy with modern amounts of information.
Easton Bell
Feynman struggled with even practical physics. Watch the video of him trying to answer the question of "What is a magnet and how does it work?". It's hilarious.
Ethan Rogers
Not Veeky Forums and who the fuck cares about psychology it's one of the most inaccurate pretentious "sciences" out there hope this thread 404s
Alexander Taylor
ITT: Mad /pol/aks that are mad that Feynman called them out on their IQ world view BS decades ago.
Christian Howard
Typical. You probably failed geometry and think math is dumb.
Christian White
>muh tangible results >muh ROI >basic research is useless
You people are killing both art and science. Enjoy your financially motivated mass entertainment and pseudoscience.
Matthew Sullivan
>Smug Jew-man stands in front of a bunch of incoherent Greek symbols strung together in an array of undefined variables and virtual particles. >The greatest mind of our generation!
I can't get over the ridiculousness of it all. Top kek.
Ryan Cooper
Those are just integrals and derivatives, you know stuff they teach you in any engineering course.
Blake Richardson
>Enjoy your financially motivated mass entertainment and pseudoscience.
You mean theoretical particle physics? How much money has been dumped into the Hadron collider now? $15 billion dollars?
Meanwhile, the Wendelstein 7-X reactor sees tangible progress for a fraction of the cost.
Luke Miller
Yes. There's nothing actually going on there. It just looks flashy. It's a photo op. That's my point.
Jason Taylor
>wendelstein 7-x is making steady progress If it was up to you the decades of basic research that made that possible would have never been financed.
Daniel Morris
Yes you are right, in that regard. I'm not a big fan of Feynman though, more of an Oppenheimer type guy.
Leo Rogers
iq only matters if your white and your hating on niggers if your white and the jews have a higher iq, in that case its nonsensical bullshit and just a pseud number
Justin Reed
...
Nathan Wilson
potent
they is kangs. they is do reading real good
they's partikull fissiks yo
Jaxson Myers
:)
Owen Wood
Don't forget Asians.
Tyler Garcia
if Asians and Jews are brought up then intelligent white supremacists just bring up standard deviation
Gavin Thompson
The white supremacists are lit Jews, always have a trick up their sleeves.
Andrew Bell
Did you make this thread because of my shitpost about Feynman's IQ in the quantum mechanics thread? Because if you did, I'm flattered.
IQ is a load of shit and doesn't belong on this board and this thread shouldn't still be up
Jayden Myers
Yea the kek is top rite? The king is naked and shit rite?
Justin Cooper
They should bring up how white people simply don't give a fuck. We don't have a race-wide inferiority complex. No white kids have sleepless nights thinking about how Asians and Jews are a standard deviation above them on average. I think it might have to do with white people not having anything to identify with.
Nathaniel Russell
feynman had a 170 iq, da fuck are you talking about?
Michael Baker
IQ TESTS ARE WORTHLESS GARBAGE Worse than that because they have a negative effect in their trickery. It's unbelievable that people still buy this crap, but then again, they don't, it's only something that power ranking faggots on forums like this care about and no one else.
Intelligence is not something you have, it's something you put to use, like strenght, it doesn't exist as a "content" that is there, it's only worth anything when you put it out there. To test it is absurd. When you test something you want to check out if something is worth it, just like a later stage of a job interview may require you to do something related to your job. If you perform well there, you may perform well in the job.
If I wanted someone to answer IQ test questions all day I'd want a guy who scores it well, otherwise, it is useless. You will find tons of correlations, that chess players have higher IQs than construction workers or something. But the whole thing is upside down. It's like realizing great swimmers do well on treadmills because they are used to aerobic exercise, except to put swimmers on treadmills to test who is best would be surreal. Just like measuring how much one can deadlift to decide their role in a war. Or how tall you are to get in a basketball team. You see how subtle the difference is? It's true that good basketball players are "usually" tall, but to test for it instead of putting him on the court to play is a misleading method, it flips things around.
IQ is worthless because what do you do with it? If you score low, should you give up on doing "intelligent things"? If you score high, does that mean you can relax in your intelligence throne? Then either way, all you do is discourage further effort. IQ does not tell you if you're going to be good at your job, it doesn't make better politicians or scientists or artists or anything. Because even if you notice that high IQ people "usually" do a better job at a certain thing, you're still deviating from properly looking at how that person does that job specifically. And then if a surprising result comes about, you go "wow, he has low iq but did something smart", which really means "he once did something not smart and now he did something smart".
IQ tests were put to use with an industrial mindset, something that could free one from contact with the subject. Test a million people and put the high IQ scores up front and you have a standard, but when you look at it up close, it's worth nothing to the individuals or to the task at hand.
Not to mention IQ is not something you have, but something you score. You can be too constipated that day to think straight and not even realize it, you can choose from multiple choice without much patience and accidentally get it right. The whole thing is a mess. It doesn't measure intelligence at all and even if you could measure intelligence through a standard like that, it would be worthless because it serves you nothing to put that intelligence to use.
Oliver Cox
I suppose if you lack all ability to think abstractly then you NEED to quantify success and will only accept something as crude as ‘number of gadgets built’.
Why are you on the lit board again?
Gavin Jackson
>99% of geniuses score highly on IQ test >1 guy scores just okay >WELP THAT DOES IT IQ TEST IS A SHAM
Jaxon Robinson
Proof for first statement or are you talking out your ass?
Ethan Smith
Plasma physics is not dependent upon sploosons, boosons and wormholes. The former is applied physics while the latter is science-fiction meant to solicit government grants and entertain gullible gentiles such as yourself.
